The State Doesn’t Trust its Soldiers

Dorisca wondered whether the slayings would lead Fort Hood’s commanding general to rethink the policy of requiring soldiers to remain unarmed while on post.

Only military police are allowed to carry firearms on a military base. Is anyone really surprised that this is the case? The state will train them to kill, send psychiatrists to their “aid” when they begin to develop problems with killing, and then send them back – ‘cured’ of their indecisiveness – to endure unbearable conditions, kill again, and continue the unwinnable war(s). Remember this from Michael Gaddy, my good friend and long-time Special Forces soldier and war veteran:

Throughout my career, no soldier, regardless of rank or position, was allowed to have in his/her private possession any firearm. When I was on the rifle/pistol team I had to go to the armory to pick up my weapons for any practice or competition and return them immediately upon completion. That always struck me as unusual. While I had 24/7 access to firearms and explosives while in the combat zone, I was not allowed to possess any such item even on a military installation unless it was for training or competition. Slaves should never be allowed the means to resist.

5 Responses to The State Doesn’t Trust its Soldiers

Johnathan says:

November 9th, 2009 at 11:18 am

Then again, perhaps is not necessarily a good thing for a standing army in (one of) its domestic headquarters to have the means to *immediately* wage violence, particularly against the adjacent unarmed populace.

Brandon says:

November 9th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

I am a police detective and always have on my shoulder rig that carries my loaded 9mm semi-auto pistol along with two additional magazines each loaded with 15 rounds and a set of handcuffs. I also carry a backup Colt 357 Magnum revolver loaded with six magnum rounds. You can walk into any police or sheriff’s station in the United States of America and will find every officer or deputy armed with a semi-auto pistol or service revolver.

Sal says:

November 9th, 2009 at 3:40 pm

This tragedy is a prime testament to the vulnerability of a disarmed populace. A military base, a shopping mall, a convenience store, you name it. Anyone bent on inflicting mayhem against other human beings has long passed the point of concern about firearms laws.

If media reports are accurate, law enforcement arrived in approximately 3 to 4 minutes. How many lives could have been saved had but one or more individuals been freely carrying firearms for the purpose of self-defense?

Whether or not the MSM spins it any other way, this incident highlights the absurdity of and true danger posed by laws pertaining to the ownership, use, and possession of firearms.

My old self always doubted that our country has been occupying Afghanistan for all these years just to looking for Osama Bin Laden. This article by Nick Turse cleared my mind. We are occupying that country to guard an oil pipeline. I wonder which oil company is powerful enough to force our country to do this!!